[Cowboy89]

The big thing in the Latimer case is the lobby and the high profile role of disabled asociations. In our country if you can prove an affliation with any sort of minority or special interest group your voice is always louder and more just. The last thing anyone wants to do is appear to disadvantage a special interest group (sometimes to the point of insanity). Canadians pride themselves of being champions of fighting for the little guy. Personally not disagreeing with the decision here because it's one thing to want to end one's own life but it's quite another to kill someone because you deemed their life to be unbearable. Years later and still not understanding that distinction and also not having respect for the law that we do not allow mercy killing is what kept Latimer from parole. It's a moral grey-zone as I'm sure Latimer has a good percentage of Canadians on his side, however maybe if we treated the laws of the land this seriously we wouldn't have as many cases as the second one where laws and sentances are merely suggestions for a judge to be persuaded to either enforce or look past or maybe legislatively we would make sure that we only passed laws that we wanted enforced.

The second case isn't as popular and thus the public is less aware that we have murderers walking freely among us still in their prime danger to the public years. We are obsessed with criminal rehabilitation over punishment suited more as a deterrant for others to commit crimes. Our laws and application thereof are simply not tough enough on real criminals. We are soft to the point that gangsters feel no deterant to carry out their activities. For the average person a criminal record could impact your job prospects and provide as a social stigma so even a light term might be punishment/deterant enough, however for those who are in gangs prison terms are worn as a badge of honor and since their later income earning potential is not threatened by a short prison term they feel no need to respect our laws.